If democrats have laid out more than enough evidence to convict him then additional evidence should not be needed. They should present their evidence and rest the case.The Democrats have laid out more than enough evidence to impeach without witnesses....but several Republican Senators did say they'd like to hear from Bolton. I think those Senators know that the witness and document evidence will eventually come out regardless of the trial...and if they vote not to allow evidence/witnesses that proved the Democrats and House impeachment articles right...they'll pay the price at the voting booth.
After reading the rules...there is allowance for witnesses after the question and debate period. I guess the theory in having them last in the trial, is that it would take time, at least a week to subpoena, depose, debate and vote on each witness before they can testify...and McConnell is probably hoping the Senators will be tired of sitting for so long without talking before it even gets to that point. I dunno...but one thing is for sure...these are not the same senate rules that the Clinton impeachment trial had.
If democrats have laid out more than enough evidence to convict him then additional evidence should not be needed. They should present their evidence and rest the case.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Whos fault is it that House democrats are negligent in their responsibility to challenge him in a court of law?According to trump, Democrats haven’t laid out any evidence since trump bragged “we have all the material”.
Senate Republicans support this coverup.
Actially what they have said is that they will decide if any additional evidence is needed after they have heard the case
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
The remedy is going to court.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
In fairness to both sides, i would like to hear the case to remove him from office first as well as Trumps defense if he decides to offer any, before i form a finale opinion.Technically that is correct. But as it stands now, and as the House Democrats are presenting the justification for the articles of impeachment, no new evidence will be permitted. It’s backasswards and deliberately so but it is what it is. If the Senate continues to vote in block there will be no new evidence permitted. It is not the way you nor I would envision a fair trial but it is what the Senate and Trump have decided to do.
We need to defend the Constitution from Trump. That's the whole point of impeachment.
The only witness that republicans wanted to call was Hunter Biden. But what would he know about Trump putting pressure on Zelensky to investigate him and his father. What would he know about Trump withholding military funding until he got that investigation? Did he know that Trump's personal lawyer, Giuliani was cohorting and conspiring with con men and former corrupt Ukraine officials to fabricate false evidence to fire the ambassador? Did he know that Trump was secretly conspiring to get Ukraine to interfere in the US election to help his re-election? The answer is no.
Iow...Hunter Biden is not a fact witness to the impeachment...he wasn't in "the loop"... and that's why the Dems rejected him as a witness. Republicans knew the rules and they got the same amount of time and opportunity to call and question the relevant witnesses that the Democrats did. And then there's Devin Nunes, knowing the whole time that the Biden conspiracy was fake, while he tried to undermine the impeachment inquiry. His days are numbered.
Whos fault is it that House democrats are negligent in their responsibility to challenge him in a court of law?
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Im npt sure why the administrations position matters at all. The correct remedy is for the judical branch to make a ruling. The court could even tell them they are not getting involved, work it out yourselves. Its still the correct course of action.The trump admin and its bastardized DoJ opposed Democrats going to court to settle this matter between the Executive and Legislative branches.
Now the trump admin supports criticizing the legislative branch for not going to court.
In fairness to both sides, i would like to hear the case to remove him from office first as well as Trumps defense if he decides to offer any, before i form a finale opinion.
There are some potential problems with calling new witnesses. Trump can still envoke executive privilage and it would tie this thing up in the courts. The delay may not be worth it.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
If he sues them it gets settled in court. Why are democrats afraid of the courts?trump and his Roy Cohn at the DoJ opposed going to court and threatened to sue. Now they hide behind court.
Why does the trump cult support multiple sides of every trump argument?
Im npt sure why the administrations position matters at all. The correct remedy is for the judical branch to make a ruling. The court could even tell them they are not getting involved, work it out yourselves. Its still the correct course of action.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Republicans Block Subpoenas for New Evidence as Impeachment Trial Begins - The New York Times
Republicans made last-minute changes to their proposed rules to placate moderates, but they held together to turn back Democratic efforts to subpoena documents.
WASHINGTON — A divided Senate began the impeachment trial of President Trump on Tuesday in utter acrimony, as Republicans blocked Democrats’ efforts to subpoena witnesses and documents related to Ukraine and moderate Republicans forced last-minute changes to rules that had been tailored to the president’s wishes.
In a series of party-line votes punctuating 12 hours of debate, Senate Republicans turned back every attempt by Democrats to subpoena documents from the White House, State Department and other agencies, as well as testimony from White House officials that could shed light on the core charges against Mr. Trump.
====================================================================
How can you have a fair trial when the defendant's lawyers won't permit evidence or witness testimony? This makes the Republicans as well as Trump look more like the crooks they really are?
[paywall - I have a NYT account]
If he sues them it gets settled in court. Why are democrats afraid of the courts?
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
I didnt say they shouldnt. Im saying theres things to consider if they do. If you think its worth it, then do it.This is one of the many trump distractive arguments.
You should have gone to court for witnesses, no matter how many years it takes.
You can’t go to court because of all the potential problems we’ll invent.
Both things are trueYet in another post you say there could be problems with going to court for witnesses and that trump could tie it up in court so it wouldn’t be worth it. You’re all over the map here, just like trump.
Oh, and trump brags that “we have all the material” and treasonous GOP senators are complicit with his coverup.
Nancy could have done it in the house. She elected to go with a half-baked cake.
Both things are true
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
The impression i have is that after the house makes its case, the senate can decide if they aant to hear from any witnesses and which ones.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
I didnt say they shouldnt. Im saying theres things to consider if they do. If you think its worth it, then do it.
It seems to me democrats want the republicans to fight the administration in court on their behalf. In what universe would democrats do that favor for Republicans?
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
We’d still be in court over documents and witnesses and rogue republicans would be saying let’s settle this at the ballot box.
McConnell is pulling another Garland .
I don't believe this will ever come up for a vote; McConnell will call for a vote to either acquit or dismiss, and it will all be over. Moscow Mitch knows he has 5/6 quivering repubs, who are quite likely to vote for witnesses; he will not let that happen.
Ah yes, you're one of those people who thinks any opinion that isnt inline with yours is a lie. Got it.Both things are the opposite. Glad I could flush your dishonesty out.
You realize that there were 3 previous impeachment inquiries that failed, and that SEVERAL House Democrats vowed to impeach him right? Way before Sept 28th, 2019.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?